johnosullivan

Ninety legal challenges in the US against the global warming fraud are bolstered by an increase in the number of top scientists now prepared to speak out.

Reported on the Hockey Schtick today is the article,EPA sued by over 90 entities for 'Greenhouse' Gas Regulations. "According to The Wall Street Journal, the Obama administration's move to curb 'greenhouse gases' using the Environmental Protection Agency has drawn legal challenges from more than 90 companies and trade associations."

Those challenges are credibly backed up by expert testimony to support their claims.

Key Witnesses to the Collapse of the Warming Fraud

Last week Professor Hal Lewis, an American scientist of great distinction quit the American Physical Society over what he saw as their perceived role in giving oxygen to the great global warming swindle. His voice is added to a growing list of eminent international scientist now going public. No less significant on that list is Dr David Evans, consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005 and a key government scientist working towards the Kyoto Protocol.

Evans first spoke out in The Australian to say, “There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None.” (‘No smoking hot spot,’ July 18, 2008).

More and more of the public are now persuaded that global warming is the greatest criminal fraud ever perpetrated. It is shockingly covered up by the US and UK governments who knowingly and cynically persist in unlawfully denying Freedom of Information requests (FOIA) time after time.

NOAA now admits the satellite’s sensors were 'degraded' but declines to answer my questions posed after my recent articles in regards to whether thousands of false readings in excess of 400 degrees Fahrenheit slipped through and may have contaminated global climate models for years.

Worryingly, NOAA sinisterly removed from its website all the data from the NOAA-16 subsystem log for the past 5 years when my articles exposed the fact that eminent US scientists reported such data flaws in 2005. No action was ever taken. NOAA cannot pretend to have not known of these faults yet the satellite's official log never recorded such failings. Until publication of my Satelligate articles, the NOAA-16 log entries on the US govt’s official website showed a record going right up to 2010. After publication of my first article all entries from 2005-10 were removed. That decade-long subsystem log clearly showed nowhere any sensor failure. I suspect that NOAA removed the last five years of entries in a cynical attempt to obfuscate their culpability.

Let the Public Have Access to the Truth

The public has a right to know why NOAA is seeking to conceal these failings when leading US climatologists made such facts known in 2005. Indeed, as per the statements of Dr Roy Spencer and others NOAA may knowingly have been feeding super-boiling temps automatically into weather/climate proprietary products sold to climate scientists for years. They then unwittingly believed such junk data and thus (falsely) argued Earth was warming dangerously.

My FOIA request asks simple questions such as: Why did NOAA not immediately and officially notify its customers of the degraded data in 2005 and why were those entries from 2005-10 removed from the NOAA-16 subsystem log?

Bring the Fraudsters into Court Now

These kinds of legal challenges bring to open court those most suspected of global warming fraud. Not just organizations like NOAA, but ringleaders such as James Hansen and Michael Mann, forcing them to provide documents and prove their flimsy AGW theory under cross-examination in a court of law.

As the Hockey Schtick article observes, “Here's what happened whenJames Hansen was 'boxed in' on the witness standonce before, dumbfounded when cross-examined and asked to name just one other scientist who agreed with his assertion that sea levels would rise more than 1 meter this century, stating "I could not, instantly."

If these crooks can't prove their case then it clearly feeds the argument of skeptics that the entire global warming narrative is a political confidence trick. While failure to answer my questions points to a cover up that constitutes conspiracy to commit fraud and substantiates the charge of willful mis-selling of junk science.